On the uniqueness of the coincidence index on orientable differentiable manifolds
|
|
- Stephanie Gibbs
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Fairfield University Math & Computer Science Faculty Publications Math & Computer Science Department On the uniqueness of the coincidence index on orientable differentiable manifolds Christopher P. Staecker Fairfield University, Copyright 2007 Elsevier, Topology and its Applications This is the author s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Topology and its Applications. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Topology and its Applications, , DOI: /j.topol Peer Reviewed Repository Citation Staecker, Christopher P., "On the uniqueness of the coincidence index on orientable differentiable manifolds" (2007). Math & Computer Science Faculty Publications. Paper Published Citation Staecker, P. Christopher, On the uniqueness of the coincidence index on orientable differentiable manifolds. Topology and its Applications, , This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Math & Computer Science Department at DigitalCommons@Fairfield. It has been accepted for inclusion in Math & Computer Science Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Fairfield. For more information, please contact digitalcommons@fairfield.edu.
2 arxiv:math/ v6 [math.gn] 23 Mar 2007 On the uniqueness of the coincidence index on orientable differentiable manifolds P. Christopher Staecker February 2, 2008 Abstract The fixed point index of topological fixed point theory is a well studied integer-valued algebraic invariant of a mapping which can be characterized by a small set of axioms. The coincidence index is an extension of the concept to topological (Nielsen) coincidence theory. We demonstrate that three natural axioms are sufficient to characterize the coincidence index in the setting of continuous mappings on oriented differentiable manifolds, the most common setting for Nielsen coincidence theory. 1 Introduction For two mappings f, g : X Y, we say that x X is a coincidence point of f and g (we write x Coin(f, g)) if f(x) = g(x). This notion generalizes the common concept of a fixed point, in which X = Y and g = id, the identity mapping. For any open set U X, let Coin(f, g, U) = Coin(f, g) U. The well known fixed point index of a mapping over a given subset (see [6] or [2]) was generalized to Nielsen coincidence theory by Schirmer [7] in the setting of mappings between oriented manifolds of the same (finite) dimension. Although Nielsen coincidence theory of nonmanifolds [4] and possibly nonorientable manifolds of nonequal dimension has been studied, very little is known, and the coincidence index is in general undefined in those settings. Since definitions of the fixed point index of a mapping on a set can be cumbersome, it is often presented in the expository literature in terms of several properties: it is homotopy invariant, is additive on disjoint subsets, and the total index over the whole space equals the Lefschetz number of the mapping. This presentation is bolstered by uniqueness results which use such properties as axioms, and demonstrate that at most one function can satisfy the axioms (see [1], in which five axioms are used). In [3], Furi, Pera, and Spadini show that three axioms: homotopy invariance, additivity, and a normalization axiom, are sufficient to uniquely characterize the fixed point index in the setting of (possibly nonoriented) differentiable manifolds. We prove a similar result in coincidence theory, though we additionally 1
3 will require our manifolds to be orientable, and we require a stronger normalization axiom. The approach, following the structure of [3], is to first demonstrate the uniqueness of the coincidence index for mappings f, g : R n R n. The uniqueness result on orientable manifolds is then obtained by approximating our mappings first by differentiable, and then (locally) by linear maps. The last section of the paper is devoted to the distinction between our normalization axiom and the weaker axiom of [3]. We show that a uniqueness result can be obtained with the weak normalization axiom in the special case of coincidence theory of selfmaps, but that this uniqueness does not extend to the general setting. I would like to thank Robert F. Brown for bringing the problem to my attention and many helpful suggestions, Julia Weber for helpful conversations and notes on early drafts of the paper, and the referees for helpful suggestions which have greatly improved the quality of the paper. 2 Preliminaries Throughout the paper, X and Y will be connected oriented differentiable manifolds of some particular dimension n. For continuous maps f, g : X Y and some open subset U X, we say that the triple (f, g, U) is admissable if the set of coincidences of f and g in U is compact. In particular, this will be true provided that U has compact closure and no coincidences on its topological boundary. Let C(X, Y ) be the set of all admissable triples of maps from X to Y. If f t, g t : X [0, 1] Y are homotopies and U X is an open subset, we say that the pair (f t, g t ) is a pair of admissable homotopies in U if {(x, t) x Coin(f t, g t, U), t [0, 1]} is a compact subset of X [0, 1]. In this case we say that (f 0, g 0, U) is admissably homotopic to (f 1, g 1, U). Let D X : H n q (X) H q (X) and D Y : H n q (Y ) H q (Y ) be the Poincaré duality isomorphisms. Given maps f, g : X Y, consider the composition H q (X) fq H q (Y ) D 1 Y H n q (Y ) gn q H n q (X) DX H q (X), where f q is the map induced in dimension q homology (with rational coefficients) by f, and g n q is the map induced in dimension n q cohomology by g. Then the Lefschetz number of f and g is defined as L(f, g) = n ( 1) q tr(d X g n q D 1 f q). q=0 Our main result concerns the uniqueness of the coincidence index with respect to the following axioms. Throughout, ind denotes a function ind : C(X, Y ) R. Y 2
4 Axiom 1 (Additivity axiom). Given (f, g, U) C(X, Y ), if U 1 and U 2 are disjoint open subsets of U with Coin(f, g, U) U 1 U 2, then ind(f, g, U) = ind(f, g, U 1 ) + ind(f, g, U 2 ). Axiom 2 (Homotopy axiom). If (f 0, g 0, U) C(X, Y ) and (f 1, g 1, U) C(X, Y ) are admissably homotopic, then ind(f 0, g 0, U) = ind(f 1, g 1, U). Axiom 3 (Normalization axiom). For (f, g, X) C(X, Y ), we have ind(f, g, X) = L(f, g). Axiom 4 (Weak normalization axiom). If (f, id, X) C(X, X), with f a constant map and id the identity map, then ind(f, id, X) = 1. The weak normalization axiom is a special case of the normalization axiom where f and g are selfmaps, since a straightforward calculation will show that L(f, id) = 1 when f is constant. The full normalization axiom is needed to handle coincidence theory of non-selfmaps, in which case the weak normalization axiom will not apply. Many of our results, however, require only the weak version, and we will be careful to indicate in our hypotheses which normalization axiom is being used. Our main result is the following: Theorem 5. There is at most one function ind : C(X, Y ) R satisfying the additivity, homotopy, and normalization axioms. This result is a slightly weakened generalization of the main result of [3], which demonstrates the uniqueness of the fixed point axiom with respect to the additivity, homotopy, and weak normalization axioms. We can derive some immediate corollaries from these three axioms, which will be useful in the exposition to follow. In the following propositions, ind : C(X, Y ) R denotes any function which satisfies the homotopy axiom, additivity axiom, and, whenever X = Y, the weak normalization axiom. Proposition 6 (Fixed-point property). If (f, id, U) C(X, X), then ind(f, id, U) = i(f, U), where the right-hand side is the well known fixed point index. Proof. To demonstrate that ind(f, id, U) is the fixed point index, we need only show that it obeys the three axioms described in [3]. Each of those three axioms are clearly special cases of our homotopy, additivity, and weak normalization axioms, so they are satisfied. Proposition 7 (Empty set property). The triple (f, g, ) is admissable, and has index 0. 3
5 Proof. By the additivity axiom, we write =, and we have and so ind(f, g, ) = 0. ind(f, g, ) = ind(f, g, ) + ind(f, g, ), Proposition 8 (Excision property). If (f, g, U) C(X, Y ) and U U is an open subset containing Coin(f, g, U), then ind(f, g, U) = ind(f, g, U ). Proof. By the additivity axiom, we have: ind(f, g, U) = ind(f, g, U ) + ind(f, g, ) = ind(f, g, U ). Proposition 9 (Solution property). If ind(f, g, U) 0, then f and g have a coincidence on U. Proof. We prove the contrapositive: if f and g have no coincidence on U, then by the excision property we have ind(f, g, U) = ind(f, g, ) = 0. 3 The coincidence index for mappings of R n Let M n be the space of linear maps A : R n R n, and Gl n the subspace of invertible maps. Define the set N M n M n as the set of all pairs of maps (A, B) such that B A Gl n. Note that N gives precisely the linear mappings for which (A, B, R n ) C(R n, R n ), since Coin(A, B) will be a linear subspace of R n, and thus will be compact if and only if it is {0}, in which case det(b A) 0. We define N + = {(A, B) det(b A) > 0}, N = {(A, B) det(b A) < 0}, and note that N is a disconnected set, with components N + and N. Each of these is open in M n M n, and therefore path-connected. Thus if some function ind : C(R n, R n ) R satisfies the homotopy axiom, then for any (A, B) M n M n, the value of ind(a, B, R n ) depends only on the path component containing (A, B). If ind additionally satisfies the weak normalization axiom, then ind(0, id, R n ) = 1, and so we have that ind(a, B, R n ) = 1 for all (A, B) N +. Lemma 10. For any (A, B) N, if ind : C(R n, R n ) R satisfies the additivity, homotopy, and weak normalization axioms, we have ind(a, B, R n ) = 1. 4
6 Proof. It suffices to show that ind(a, B, R n ) = 1 for some particular pair (Â, ˆB) N. We will show this for ˆB = id and  the linear map of the same name described in Lemma 3.1 of [3]: Â(x 1,..., x n 1, x n ) = (0,...,0, 2x n ). Since we are taking ˆB to be the identity map, Proposition 6 implies that we need only demonstrate that the fixed point index of  is 1, and this is demonstrated in Lemma 3.1 of [3]. The above discussion and lemma give our first uniqueness result. Lemma 11. For any ind : C(R n, R n ) R satisfying the additivity, homotopy, and weak normalization axioms, if A, B : R n R n are linear maps and (A, B, R n ) C(R n, R n ), then ind(a, B, R n ) = signdet(b A). For differentiable maps f, g : X Y, let df x, dg x : R n R n denote the derivative maps of f and g at the point x X. If the triple (f, g, U) is admissable, and dg p df p Gl n for every p Coin(f, g, U), then we say that the triple (f, g, U) is nondegenerate. Since we have established that the index is very well behaved for linear mappings, the following linearization result for the index is very useful. Lemma 12. Let (f, g, U) C(R n, R n ) be a nondegenerate triple. Then each coincidence point p of f and g is isolated, and for some isolating neighborhood V of p, we have ind(f, g, V ) = ind(df p, dg p, R n ), where ind : C(R n, R n ) R is any function satisfying the additivity, homotopy, and weak normalization axioms. Proof. Let p be a coincidence point. Since f and g are differentiable at p, we have f(x) = f(p) + df p (x p) + x p ǫ(x p), g(x) = g(p) + dg p (x p) + x p δ(x p), where ǫ, δ : U R n are continuous with ǫ(0) = δ(0) = 0. Then we have g(x) f(x) = (dg p df p )(x p) + x p (δ(x p) ǫ(x p)) (dg p df p )(x p) x p δ(x p) ǫ(x p) Since dg p df p is a linear map, we have (dg p df p )(x p) = x p (dg p df p ) ( x p ( x p x p ) inf (dg p df p )(v) v =1 ), 5
7 and so ( ) g(x) f(x) x p inf (dg p df p )(v) δ(x p) ǫ(x p). v =1 The infimum is known to be strictly positive, since (f, g, U) is nondegenerate. Thus for all x sufficiently close to p, the term δ(x p) ǫ(x p) will be sufficiently small so that g(x) f(x) > 0, which is to say that p is an isolated coincidence point. It remains to show that if V is an isolating neighborhood of p, then Define the following homotopies: ind(f, g, V ) = ind(df p, dg p, R n ). f t (x) = f(p) + df p (x p) + t x p ǫ(x p), g t (x) = g(p) + dg p (x p) + t x p δ(x p). By the same argument as above, for all t [0, 1] we have g t (x) f t (x) > 0 for all x in some neighborhood W V of p. Thus (f t, g t ) is an admissable homotopy on W of f and g to the affine linear maps x f(p) + df p (x p) and x g(p)+dg p (x p). These affine linear maps have p as their only coincidence point, since dg p df p Gl n. Thus we have ind(f, g, W) = ind(f(p) + df p (x p), g(p) + dg p (x p), W) = ind(f(p) + df p (x p), g(p) + dg p (x p), R n ) by the homotopy axiom and the excision property. But these affine maps are clearly admissably homotopic to df p and dg p, and so we have ind(f, g, V ) = ind(f, g, W) = ind(df p, dg p, R n ), where the first equality is by the excision property, and the second is by the homotopy axiom. 4 The coincidence index for mappings of orientable manifolds Lemmas 11 and 12 established the uniqueness of the index for nondegenerate pairs of mappings on R n with respect to the additivity, homotopy, and weak normalization axioms. The next two lemmas show that any index for nondegenerate pairs on arbitrary orientable manifolds is computed similarly to the index of Lemma 11. 6
8 Lemma 13. If (f, g, U) C(X, Y ) is a nondegenerate triple, then each coincidence point is isolated. Proof. For some p Coin(f, g, U), choose a chart Z q Y containing q = f(p) = g(p) with a diffeomorphism ψ q : Z q R n. Choose a chart W p f 1 (Z q ) g 1 (Z q ) containing p with a diffeomorphism φ p : W p R n. Define ω : C(W p, X) C(R n, R n ) by ω(f, g, W p ) = (ψ q f φ 1 p, ψ q g φ 1 p, φ p(w p )). Since (f, g, U) is nondegenerate, then clearly (f, g, W p ) will be nondegenerate. For any coincidence point x Coin(ω(f, g, W p )), we have d(ψ q f φp 1 ) x d(ψ q g φ 1 p ) x = d(ψ q ) f(φ 1 (x)) (df φ 1 (x) dg φ 1 (x) )d(φ 1 p ) x, since f(φp 1 (x)) = g(φ 1 p (x)). Since φ p and ψ q are diffeomorphisms, the above will be in Gl n by nondegeneracy of (f, g, W p ). Thus ω(f, g, W p ) is nondegenerate, which implies by Lemma 12 that Coin(ω(f, g, W p )) is a set of isolated points. But this coincidence set is in diffeomorphic correspondence via φ p and ψ q to Coin(f, g, W p ), so this too is a set of isolated points, and in particular p is an isolated coincidence point. We note that the next Lemma contains our only use of the full (rather than the weak) normalization axiom, and also our only use of the orientability hypothesis on the manifolds X and Y. Lemma 14. If (f, g, U) C(X, Y ) is a nondegenerate triple, and ind : C(X, Y ) R satisfies the additivity, homotopy, and normalization axioms, then ind(f, g, U) = sign(det(dg p df p )). (1) p Coin(f,g,U) Proof. Note that since (f, g, U) is nondegenerate, by Lemma 13 the coincidence set C = Coin(f, g, U) consists of finitely many isolated points. First we prove the theorem in the special case where X = Y = R n. For each coincidence point p U, let V p be an isolating neighborhood of p. Since C is compact, we may choose the sets V p to be pairwise disjoint. Then by the additivity property, Lemma 12, and Lemma 11, we have ind(f, g, U) = p C = p C ind(f, g, V p ) = p C sign(det(dg p df p )). p p p ind(df p, dg p, R n ) It remains to prove the result in the general case that X and Y are not both R n. About each isolated coincidence point p, choose pairwise disjoint isolating neighborhoods W p diffeomorphic to R n by orientation preserving diffeomorphisms φ p : W p R n. We also choose neighborhoods Z q of each coincidence 7
9 value q = f(p) = g(p) with Z q diffeomorphic to R n by orientation preserving diffeomorphisms ψ q : Z q R n. Let ω : C(W p, Y ) C(R n, R n ) be as in Lemma 13. Note that ω has an inverse given by ω 1 (F, G, S) = (ψ 1 q F φ p, ψ 1 q G φ p, φ 1 p (S)), where (F, G, S) C(R n, R n ). Then we have trivially that ind(f, g, W p ) = ind ω 1 (ω(f, g, W p )). We now note that ind ω 1 : C(R n, R n ) R satisfies the additivity, homotopy, and normalization axioms. The additivity and homotopy axioms are clear, but a brief calculation is needed for the normalization axiom. We must show that ind ω 1 (F, G, R n ) = L(F, G). We have ind(ω 1 (F, G, R n )) = ind(ψ 1 q = L(ψ 1 q F φ p, ψ 1 q G φ p, W p ) F φ p, ψ 1 q G φ p ) by the normalization axiom. Consider the diagram: H (W p ) D 1 X H n (W p ) φ p H (R n ) D 1 R n φ p H n (R n ) F H (R n ) D R n G n H n (R n ) ψq 1 H (Z q ) D Y ψ 1 q H n (Z q ) where starred maps are the induced maps in (co)homology. The Lefschetz number above is the alternating sum of the traces of the maps formed by a clockwise walk around the perimeter of the diagram, starting at the upper left corner. Note by the functoriality of the duality maps that the squares at right and left in the diagram will commute. Using this fact, along with cyclic permutation of maps inside the trace, we have tr(d 1 X φ p ψ 1 q D Y ψq 1 F φ p ) = tr(d 1 X φ p G D R n F φ p ) = tr(φ p D 1 X φ p G D R n F ) and so L(ψ 1 q F φ p, ψ 1 q = tr(d 1 R n G D R n F ), G φ p ) = L(F, G), which shows that ind ω 1 satisfies the normalization axiom. We have shown that ind ω 1 is a real valued function on C(R n, R n ) which satisfies the three axioms. Thus, by the special case above, it is calculated according to (1). 8
10 Thus we have: ind(f, g, U) = p C = p C ind(f, g, W p ) = p C sign(det(dψ q dg p dφ 1 p ind ω 1 (ω(f, g, W p )) dψ q df p dφ 1 p )) by the derivative chain rule. (For brevity, we have written dφ 1 p d(φp 1 ) p and dψ q to indicate d(ψ q ) q.) But the above is simply p C sign(det(dψ q (dg p df p )dφ 1 p )) = sign(det(dg p df p )) p C since all φ p and ψ q are taken to be orientation preserving. to indicate One final Lemma is required, showing that any pair of maps can be approximated by a nondegenerate pair of maps. Lemma 15. Let (f, g, U) C(X, Y ), and V U be an open subset containing Coin(f, g, U) with compact closure V U. Then (f, g, V ) is admissably homotopic to a nondegenerate triple. Proof. In order to facilitate the construction of explicit straight-line homotopies, we begin by embedding our manifolds in some Euclidean space, and approximating our maps accordingly by close polynomial approximations. Without loss of generality, assume that X and Y are embedded in R k for some k. By the ǫ-neighborhood theorem (see [5]), there exists a neighborhood Ω of Y in R k with a submersive retraction r : Ω Y such that x r(x) = dist(x, Y ). For any δ > 0, by the Weierstrass approximation theorem, there exist polynomial maps f δ, g δ : R k R k with f(x) f δ (x) < δ and g(x) g δ (x) < δ for all x V. Since V is compact, we may choose δ sufficiently small so that the homotopies f t (x) = r((1 t)f(x) + tf δ (x)) g t (x) = r((1 t)g(x) + tg δ (x)) are well-defined and (f t, g t ) is an admissable homotopy on V. Thus the pair (f, g) is admissably homotopic to (r f δ, r g δ ) in V. To simplify our notation, let f = r f δ, and g = r g δ. We will show that the pair (f, g ) is admissably homotopic to some nondegenerate pair. Let B be a ball about the origin sufficiently small that for all x V and y B the function x r(f (x) + y) is defined and has no coincidences with g on V. Then define H : V B V Y by and note that the derivative map H(x, y) = (x, r(f (x) + y)), dh (x,y) : R k R k R k T r(f (x)+y)y 9
11 is surjective (since r is a submersion). Thus at points where the image of H intersects with the graph of g in V Y, the intersection will be transversal. By the transversality theorem (see [5]), H(x, y) is transversal to graphg for almost all y B. Choose one such ȳ so that H(x) = (x, r(f (x) + ȳ)) is transversal to graphg. Note that a pair of mappings is nondegenerate if and only if their graphs intersect transversally. This means that (r(f + ȳ), g, V )) is a nondegenerate triple. But our assumption on B means that the homotopy given by (r(f + tȳ), g ) is admissable on V, and thus the nondegenerate triple above is admissably homotopic to (f, g, V ), which has already been shown to be admissably homotopic to (f, g, V ). Now we are ready to prove Theorem 5: Proof. If (f, g, U) C(X, Y ), then by Lemma 15 there is an open set V U containing Coin(f, g, U) with (f, g, V ) admissably homotopic to a nondegenerate triple (f, g, V ). Thus by excision and the homotopy axiom, we have ind(f, g, U) = ind(f, g, U), and so by Lemma 14 we have ind(f, g, U) = sign(det(dg p df p )). p Coin(f,g,V ) The above calculation does not depend on the choice of nondegenerate triple (f, g, U), since any alternative choice would automatically have the same index by the homotopy axiom. Since any coincidence index must obey the calculation given above, we have shown that all indices must agree, and that there is at most one. At this point we will briefly address the issue of the existence of the coincidence index. The above lemmas could be used to define a coincidence index in the following way: given any admissable triple (f, g, U), let (f, g, V ) be a nondegenerate triple given by Lemma 15, admissably homotopic to (f, g, V ) with Coin(f, g, U) V. We then define ind(f, g, U) = ind(f, g, V ), where ind(f, g, V ) is computed according to (1). An index defined in this way would clearly satisfy our axioms, provided that it is well defined. We believe this to be the case, but a verification is apparently nontrivial, and would require a demonstration of: Conjecture 16. If (f, g, U) and (h, k, U) are admissably homotopic nondegenerate triples, then sign(det(dg p df p )) = sign(det(dk q dh q )). p Coin(f,g,U) q Coin(h,k,U) 10
12 5 Uniqueness and the weak normalization axiom It is natural to ask whether any meaningful version of the above theorem can be proved using the weak normalization axiom in place of the full normalization axiom. Since the weak normalization can only apply to selfmaps, an obvious question is: is there is a unique coincidence index on C(X, X) R which satisfies the homotopy, additivity, and weak normalization axioms? We answer this question in the affirmative, and additionaly show that orientability of X is not required in this setting. Theorem 17. For any particular (perhaps nonorientable) differentiable manifold X, there is at most one coincidence index ind : C(X, X) R satisfying the additivity, homotopy, and weak normalization axioms. Proof. Note that the proof of Lemma 14 is the only place where either of the orientability hypothesis or the full (as opposed to the weak) normalization axiom is used. Thus our proof here may make use of any of our lemmas except for Lemma 14. As in the proof of Theorem 5, our proof consists of deriving a formula for the computation of the index of some triple (f, g, U). By Lemma 15 we may assume without loss of generality that (f, g, U) is nondegenerate. As in the proof of Lemma 14, an explicit formula for the index is clear in the special case where X = R n. In the case where X is not R n, we first change the triple (f, g, U) by a homotopy, and then follow similar steps to those used in Lemma 14. For some isolated coincidence point p, let q = f(p) = g(p). Let γ : [0, 1] X be a path in X from q to p which avoids all other points of Coin(f, g, U), and let V be a contractible neighborhood of γ with closure disjoint from Coin(f, g, U). Since V is homeomorphic to an open ball in R n, there are homotopies f t, g t such that f t and g t agree for all t with f and g, respectively, on U V, and Coin(f t, g t, V ) = {p} with f t (p) = g t (p) = γ(t). Thus the triple (f t, g t, U) will be an admissable homotopy of the triple (f, g, U) to some triple (f 1, g 1, U), with f 1 (p) = g 1 (p) = p. In this way, we have converted the coincidence point at p into a fixed point at p without disturbing the behavior of f and g at the other coincidence points. By iterating the above construction for each coincidence point p, we obtain an admissable triple (f, g, U) admissably homotopic to (f, g, U) such that all points of Coin(f, g, U) are actually fixed points of both f and g. We now continue as in the proof of Lemma 14. About each isolated coincidence point p Coin(f, g, U), choose pairwise disjoint isolating neighborhoods W p diffeomorphic to R n by diffeomorphisms φ p : W p R n. Letting V p = f 1 (W p ) g 1 (W p ) W p, we will define ω(f, g, V p ) C(R n, R n ) as in Lemma 13, only this time our two charts can be taken to be the same, since p is a fixed point. Let ω(f, g, V p ) = (φ p f φ 1 p, φ p g φ 1 p, φ(v p )), 11
13 and as in Lemma 14, we note that ω has an inverse given by ω 1 (F, G, S) = (φ 1 p F φ p, φ 1 p G φ p, V p ), and trivially we have ind(f, g, V p ) = ind ω 1 (ω(f, g, V p )). Now we note that ind ω 1 : C(R n, R n ) R satisfies the additivity, homotopy, and weak normalization axioms. The additivity and homotopy axioms are clear, and the weak normalization is not difficult: if F is the constant function F(x) = c and G is the identity, then ind ω 1 (F, G, S) = ind(φ 1 (c), id, V p ), and this equals 1 by the weak normalization axiom. Thus ind ω 1 satisfies the additivity, homotopy, and weak normalization axioms, and so is the coincidence index by our special case above for X = R n. Thus, letting C = Coin(f, g, U), we have ind(f, g, U) = ind(f, g, U) = p C = p C = p C ind(ω(f, g, V p )) = p C sign(det(dg p df p)) ind(f, g, V p ) = p C ind ω 1 (ω(f, g, V p )) sign(det(dφ p dg p dφ 1 p dφ p df p dφ 1 p )) By the homotopy axiom, this formula is independent of the choice of the admissible homotopy to (f, g, U), and the uniqueness is shown. The above theorem could be restated as follows: If C s is the class of all admissable triples of selfmaps on differentiable manifolds, then there is a unique coincidence index ind : C s R which satisfies the additivity, homotopy, and weak normalization axioms. This index, for any triple (f, g, U), would be defined by using the unique index defined on C(X, X), where X is the domain of f and g. Our above theorem, in this sense, can be seen as a direct generalization of the result of [3] to coincidence theory of selfmaps. A natural question to ask is whether a further extension of [3] can be made to non-selfmaps as follows: If C is the set of all admissable triples (f, g, U) where f and g are maps between orientable differentiable manifolds of the same dimension, is a coincidence index satisfying the additivity and homotopy axioms, which additionally satisfies the weak normalization axiom whenever f and g are selfmaps, unique? Such a uniqueness result would be stronger than our Theorem 5 but is false as the following example illustrates. Example 18. Let C be as above, the set of all admissable triples. Letting Ind (X,Y ) denote the unique coincidence index on C(X, Y ) given by Theorem 5, we can define a single index Ind : C R by Ind(f, g, U) = Ind (X,Y ) (f, g, U) when (f, g, U) C(X, Y ). This gives a single coincidence index Ind on C which satisfies the additivity, homotopy, and normalization axioms. 12
14 For any c R, define i c : C R as follows: { Ind(f, g, U) if f, g are selfmaps, i c (f, g, U) = c Ind(f, g, U) otherwise. For any value of c, this function clearly satisfies the additivity and homotopy axioms, and also satisfies the weak normalization axiom in the case when f and g are selfmaps. Variation of the parameter c in the above example will produce many distinct indices on C which satisfy the additivity, homotopy, and (when applicable) weak normalization axioms. Thus Theorems 5 and 17 seem to be the best uniqueness results available in our setting. References [1] R. Brown. An elementary proof of the uniqueness of the fixed point index. Pacific Journal of Mathematics, 35: , [2] R. Brown. The Lefschetz Fixed Point Theorem. Scott, Foresman and Company, [3] M. Furi, M. P. Pera, and M. Spadini. On the uniqueness of the fixed point index on differentiable manifolds. Fixed Point Theory and Applications, 4: , [4] D. L. Gonçalves. Coincidence theory for maps from a complex into a manifold. Topology and Its Applications, 92:63 77, [5] V. Guillemin and A. Pollack. Differential Topology. Prentice-Hall, [6] B. Jiang. Lectures on Nielsen fixed point Theory. Contemporary Mathematics 14, American Mathematical Society, [7] H. Schirmer. Mindestzahlen von Koinzidenzpunkten. Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik, 194:21 39,
arxiv:math/ v4 [math.gn] 25 Nov 2006
arxiv:math/0607751v4 [math.gn] 25 Nov 2006 On the uniqueness of the coincidence index on orientable differentiable manifolds P. Christoher Staecker October 12, 2006 Abstract The fixed oint index of toological
More informationAxioms for a local Reidemeister trace in fixed point and coincidence theory on differentiable manifolds
Fairfield University DigitalCommons@Fairfield Math & Computer Science Faculty Publications Math & Computer Science Department 1-1-2009 Axioms for a local Reidemeister trace in fixed point and coincidence
More informationDIFFERENTIAL TOPOLOGY AND THE POINCARÉ-HOPF THEOREM
DIFFERENTIAL TOPOLOGY AND THE POINCARÉ-HOPF THEOREM ARIEL HAFFTKA 1. Introduction In this paper we approach the topology of smooth manifolds using differential tools, as opposed to algebraic ones such
More informationTransversality. Abhishek Khetan. December 13, Basics 1. 2 The Transversality Theorem 1. 3 Transversality and Homotopy 2
Transversality Abhishek Khetan December 13, 2017 Contents 1 Basics 1 2 The Transversality Theorem 1 3 Transversality and Homotopy 2 4 Intersection Number Mod 2 4 5 Degree Mod 2 4 1 Basics Definition. Let
More informationEilenberg-Steenrod properties. (Hatcher, 2.1, 2.3, 3.1; Conlon, 2.6, 8.1, )
II.3 : Eilenberg-Steenrod properties (Hatcher, 2.1, 2.3, 3.1; Conlon, 2.6, 8.1, 8.3 8.5 Definition. Let U be an open subset of R n for some n. The de Rham cohomology groups (U are the cohomology groups
More informationAN EXTENSION OF THE NOTION OF ZERO-EPI MAPS TO THE CONTEXT OF TOPOLOGICAL SPACES
AN EXTENSION OF THE NOTION OF ZERO-EPI MAPS TO THE CONTEXT OF TOPOLOGICAL SPACES MASSIMO FURI AND ALFONSO VIGNOLI Abstract. We introduce the class of hyper-solvable equations whose concept may be regarded
More informationALGEBRAICALLY TRIVIAL, BUT TOPOLOGICALLY NON-TRIVIAL MAP. Contents 1. Introduction 1
ALGEBRAICALLY TRIVIAL, BUT TOPOLOGICALLY NON-TRIVIAL MAP HONG GYUN KIM Abstract. I studied the construction of an algebraically trivial, but topologically non-trivial map by Hopf map p : S 3 S 2 and a
More informationA fixed point theorem for smooth extension maps
A fixed point theorem for smooth extension maps Nirattaya Khamsemanan Robert F. Brown Catherine Lee Sompong Dhompongsa Abstract Let X be a compact smooth n-manifold, with or without boundary, and let A
More information10 Excision and applications
22 CHAPTER 1. SINGULAR HOMOLOGY be a map of short exact sequences of chain complexes. If two of the three maps induced in homology by f, g, and h are isomorphisms, then so is the third. Here s an application.
More informationThe coincidence Nielsen number for maps into real projective spaces
F U N D A M E N T A MATHEMATICAE 140 (1992) The coincidence Nielsen number for maps into real projective spaces by Jerzy J e z i e r s k i (Warszawa) Abstract. We give an algorithm to compute the coincidence
More informationCup product and intersection
Cup product and intersection Michael Hutchings March 28, 2005 Abstract This is a handout for my algebraic topology course. The goal is to explain a geometric interpretation of the cup product. Namely,
More information32 Proof of the orientation theorem
88 CHAPTER 3. COHOMOLOGY AND DUALITY 32 Proof of the orientation theorem We are studying the way in which local homological information gives rise to global information, especially on an n-manifold M.
More informationTopological properties
CHAPTER 4 Topological properties 1. Connectedness Definitions and examples Basic properties Connected components Connected versus path connected, again 2. Compactness Definition and first examples Topological
More informationAlgebraic Topology Homework 4 Solutions
Algebraic Topology Homework 4 Solutions Here are a few solutions to some of the trickier problems... Recall: Let X be a topological space, A X a subspace of X. Suppose f, g : X X are maps restricting to
More informationCHAPTER 7. Connectedness
CHAPTER 7 Connectedness 7.1. Connected topological spaces Definition 7.1. A topological space (X, T X ) is said to be connected if there is no continuous surjection f : X {0, 1} where the two point set
More informationCW-complexes. Stephen A. Mitchell. November 1997
CW-complexes Stephen A. Mitchell November 1997 A CW-complex is first of all a Hausdorff space X equipped with a collection of characteristic maps φ n α : D n X. Here n ranges over the nonnegative integers,
More information(FALL 2011) 225A - DIFFERENTIAL TOPOLOGY FINAL < HOPF DEGREE THEOREM >
(FALL 2011) 225A - DIFFERENTIAL TOPOLOGY FINAL < HOPF DEGREE THEOREM > GEUNHO GIM 1. Without loss of generality, we can assume that x = z = 0. Let A = df 0. By regularity at 0, A is a linear isomorphism.
More informationMath 225B: Differential Geometry, Final
Math 225B: Differential Geometry, Final Ian Coley March 5, 204 Problem Spring 20,. Show that if X is a smooth vector field on a (smooth) manifold of dimension n and if X p is nonzero for some point of
More informationEpsilon Nielsen coincidence theory
Cent. Eur. J. Math. 12(9) 2014 1337-1348 DOI: 10.2478/s11533-014-0412-3 Central European Journal of Mathematics Epsilon Nielsen coincidence theory Research Article Marcio Colombo Fenille 1 1 Faculdade
More informationMath 868 Final Exam. Part 1. Complete 5 of the following 7 sentences to make a precise definition (5 points each). Y (φ t ) Y lim
SOLUTIONS Dec 13, 218 Math 868 Final Exam In this exam, all manifolds, maps, vector fields, etc. are smooth. Part 1. Complete 5 of the following 7 sentences to make a precise definition (5 points each).
More informationPICARD S THEOREM STEFAN FRIEDL
PICARD S THEOREM STEFAN FRIEDL Abstract. We give a summary for the proof of Picard s Theorem. The proof is for the most part an excerpt of [F]. 1. Introduction Definition. Let U C be an open subset. A
More informationTHE JORDAN-BROUWER SEPARATION THEOREM
THE JORDAN-BROUWER SEPARATION THEOREM WOLFGANG SCHMALTZ Abstract. The Classical Jordan Curve Theorem says that every simple closed curve in R 2 divides the plane into two pieces, an inside and an outside
More informationFUNDAMENTAL GROUPS AND THE VAN KAMPEN S THEOREM
FUNDAMENTAL GROUPS AND THE VAN KAMPEN S THEOREM ANG LI Abstract. In this paper, we start with the definitions and properties of the fundamental group of a topological space, and then proceed to prove Van-
More informationOn open 3-manifolds proper homotopy equivalent to geometrically simply-connected polyhedra
arxiv:math/9810098v2 [math.gt] 29 Jun 1999 On open 3-manifolds proper homotopy equivalent to geometrically simply-connected polyhedra L. Funar T.L. Thickstun Institut Fourier BP 74 University of Grenoble
More information7. Homotopy and the Fundamental Group
7. Homotopy and the Fundamental Group The group G will be called the fundamental group of the manifold V. J. Henri Poincaré, 895 The properties of a topological space that we have developed so far have
More informationMath 215B: Solutions 3
Math 215B: Solutions 3 (1) For this problem you may assume the classification of smooth one-dimensional manifolds: Any compact smooth one-dimensional manifold is diffeomorphic to a finite disjoint union
More informationLecture 4: Stabilization
Lecture 4: Stabilization There are many stabilization processes in topology, and often matters simplify in a stable limit. As a first example, consider the sequence of inclusions (4.1) S 0 S 1 S 2 S 3
More informationON THE DEGREE FOR ORIENTED QUASI-FREDHOLM MAPS: ITS UNIQUENESS AND ITS EFFECTIVE EXTENSION OF THE LERAY SCHAUDER DEGREE
ON THE DEGREE FOR ORIENTED QUASI-FREDHOLM MAPS: ITS UNIQUENESS AND ITS EFFECTIVE EXTENSION OF THE LERAY SCHAUDER DEGREE PIERLUIGI BENEVIERI, ALESSANDRO CALAMAI, AND MASSIMO FURI Abstract. In a previous
More informationLECTURE 11: TRANSVERSALITY
LECTURE 11: TRANSVERSALITY Let f : M N be a smooth map. In the past three lectures, we are mainly studying the image of f, especially when f is an embedding. Today we would like to study the pre-image
More informationfy (X(g)) Y (f)x(g) gy (X(f)) Y (g)x(f)) = fx(y (g)) + gx(y (f)) fy (X(g)) gy (X(f))
1. Basic algebra of vector fields Let V be a finite dimensional vector space over R. Recall that V = {L : V R} is defined to be the set of all linear maps to R. V is isomorphic to V, but there is no canonical
More informationMath 225A: Differential Topology, Final Exam
Math 225A: Differential Topology, Final Exam Ian Coley December 9, 2013 The goal is the following theorem. Theorem (Hopf). Let M be a compact n-manifold without boundary, and let f, g : M S n be two smooth
More informationOn the Diffeomorphism Group of S 1 S 2. Allen Hatcher
On the Diffeomorphism Group of S 1 S 2 Allen Hatcher This is a revision, written in December 2003, of a paper of the same title that appeared in the Proceedings of the AMS 83 (1981), 427-430. The main
More informationMATH 8253 ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY WEEK 12
MATH 8253 ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY WEEK 2 CİHAN BAHRAN 3.2.. Let Y be a Noetherian scheme. Show that any Y -scheme X of finite type is Noetherian. Moreover, if Y is of finite dimension, then so is X. Write f
More informationWe have the following immediate corollary. 1
1. Thom Spaces and Transversality Definition 1.1. Let π : E B be a real k vector bundle with a Euclidean metric and let E 1 be the set of elements of norm 1. The Thom space T (E) of E is the quotient E/E
More informationPart II. Algebraic Topology. Year
Part II Year 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2017 Paper 3, Section II 18I The n-torus is the product of n circles: 5 T n = } S 1. {{.. S } 1. n times For all n 1 and 0
More informationMath 147, Homework 5 Solutions Due: May 15, 2012
Math 147, Homework 5 Solutions Due: May 15, 2012 1 Let f : R 3 R 6 and φ : R 3 R 3 be the smooth maps defined by: f(x, y, z) = (x 2, y 2, z 2, xy, xz, yz) and φ(x, y, z) = ( x, y, z) (a) Show that f is
More informationPolynomial mappings into a Stiefel manifold and immersions
Polynomial mappings into a Stiefel manifold and immersions Iwona Krzyżanowska Zbigniew Szafraniec November 2011 Abstract For a polynomial mapping from S n k to the Stiefel manifold Ṽk(R n ), where n k
More informationThe Fundamental Group and Covering Spaces
Chapter 8 The Fundamental Group and Covering Spaces In the first seven chapters we have dealt with point-set topology. This chapter provides an introduction to algebraic topology. Algebraic topology may
More informationINVERSE FUNCTION THEOREM and SURFACES IN R n
INVERSE FUNCTION THEOREM and SURFACES IN R n Let f C k (U; R n ), with U R n open. Assume df(a) GL(R n ), where a U. The Inverse Function Theorem says there is an open neighborhood V U of a in R n so that
More informationBordism and the Pontryagin-Thom Theorem
Bordism and the Pontryagin-Thom Theorem Richard Wong Differential Topology Term Paper December 2, 2016 1 Introduction Given the classification of low dimensional manifolds up to equivalence relations such
More informationTHE FUNDAMENTAL GROUP AND BROUWER S FIXED POINT THEOREM AMANDA BOWER
THE FUNDAMENTAL GROUP AND BROUWER S FIXED POINT THEOREM AMANDA BOWER Abstract. The fundamental group is an invariant of topological spaces that measures the contractibility of loops. This project studies
More informationHandlebody Decomposition of a Manifold
Handlebody Decomposition of a Manifold Mahuya Datta Statistics and Mathematics Unit Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata mahuya@isical.ac.in January 12, 2012 contents Introduction What is a handlebody
More informationMath 205C - Topology Midterm
Math 205C - Topology Midterm Erin Pearse 1. a) State the definition of an n-dimensional topological (differentiable) manifold. An n-dimensional topological manifold is a topological space that is Hausdorff,
More informationHomework 3 MTH 869 Algebraic Topology
Homework 3 MTH 869 Algebraic Topology Joshua Ruiter February 12, 2018 Proposition 0.1 (Exercise 1.1.10). Let (X, x 0 ) and (Y, y 0 ) be pointed, path-connected spaces. Let f : I X y 0 } and g : I x 0 }
More informationLECTURE 5: SMOOTH MAPS. 1. Smooth Maps
LECTURE 5: SMOOTH MAPS 1. Smooth Maps Recall that a smooth function on a smooth manifold M is a function f : M R so that for any chart 1 {ϕ α, U α, V α } of M, the function f ϕ 1 α is a smooth function
More informationi = f iα : φ i (U i ) ψ α (V α ) which satisfy 1 ) Df iα = Df jβ D(φ j φ 1 i ). (39)
2.3 The derivative A description of the tangent bundle is not complete without defining the derivative of a general smooth map of manifolds f : M N. Such a map may be defined locally in charts (U i, φ
More information1 )(y 0) {1}. Thus, the total count of points in (F 1 (y)) is equal to deg y0
1. Classification of 1-manifolds Theorem 1.1. Let M be a connected 1 manifold. Then M is diffeomorphic either to [0, 1], [0, 1), (0, 1), or S 1. We know that none of these four manifolds are not diffeomorphic
More informationNonabelian Poincare Duality (Lecture 8)
Nonabelian Poincare Duality (Lecture 8) February 19, 2014 Let M be a compact oriented manifold of dimension n. Then Poincare duality asserts the existence of an isomorphism H (M; A) H n (M; A) for any
More informationAnalysis II: The Implicit and Inverse Function Theorems
Analysis II: The Implicit and Inverse Function Theorems Jesse Ratzkin November 17, 2009 Let f : R n R m be C 1. When is the zero set Z = {x R n : f(x) = 0} the graph of another function? When is Z nicely
More informationNotes on Differential Topology
Notes on Differential Topology George Torres Last updated January 18, 2018 Contents 1 Smooth manifolds and Topological manifolds 3 1.1 Smooth Structures............................................ 3 1.2
More informationGeneral Topology. Summer Term Michael Kunzinger
General Topology Summer Term 2016 Michael Kunzinger michael.kunzinger@univie.ac.at Universität Wien Fakultät für Mathematik Oskar-Morgenstern-Platz 1 A-1090 Wien Preface These are lecture notes for a
More informationMATH8808: ALGEBRAIC TOPOLOGY
MATH8808: ALGEBRAIC TOPOLOGY DAWEI CHEN Contents 1. Underlying Geometric Notions 2 1.1. Homotopy 2 1.2. Cell Complexes 3 1.3. Operations on Cell Complexes 3 1.4. Criteria for Homotopy Equivalence 4 1.5.
More informationChapter 1. Smooth Manifolds
Chapter 1. Smooth Manifolds Theorem 1. [Exercise 1.18] Let M be a topological manifold. Then any two smooth atlases for M determine the same smooth structure if and only if their union is a smooth atlas.
More informationMath 147, Homework 1 Solutions Due: April 10, 2012
1. For what values of a is the set: Math 147, Homework 1 Solutions Due: April 10, 2012 M a = { (x, y, z) : x 2 + y 2 z 2 = a } a smooth manifold? Give explicit parametrizations for open sets covering M
More informationLECTURE Itineraries We start with a simple example of a dynamical system obtained by iterating the quadratic polynomial
LECTURE. Itineraries We start with a simple example of a dynamical system obtained by iterating the quadratic polynomial f λ : R R x λx( x), where λ [, 4). Starting with the critical point x 0 := /2, we
More informationFUNDAMENTAL GROUPS AND THE VAN KAMPEN S THEOREM. Contents
FUNDAMENTAL GROUPS AND THE VAN KAMPEN S THEOREM SAMUEL BLOOM Abstract. In this paper, we define the fundamental group of a topological space and explore its structure, and we proceed to prove Van-Kampen
More informationAlgebraic Topology European Mathematical Society Zürich 2008 Tammo tom Dieck Georg-August-Universität
1 Algebraic Topology European Mathematical Society Zürich 2008 Tammo tom Dieck Georg-August-Universität Corrections for the first printing Page 7 +6: j is already assumed to be an inclusion. But the assertion
More informationThe theory of manifolds Lecture 3
The theory of manifolds Lecture 3 We recall that a subset, X, of R N is an n-dimensional manifold, if, for every p X, there exists an open set, U R n, a neighborhood, V, of p in R N and a C -diffeomorphism,
More informationLECTURE: KOBORDISMENTHEORIE, WINTER TERM 2011/12; SUMMARY AND LITERATURE
LECTURE: KOBORDISMENTHEORIE, WINTER TERM 2011/12; SUMMARY AND LITERATURE JOHANNES EBERT 1.1. October 11th. 1. Recapitulation from differential topology Definition 1.1. Let M m, N n, be two smooth manifolds
More informationReal Analysis Math 131AH Rudin, Chapter #1. Dominique Abdi
Real Analysis Math 3AH Rudin, Chapter # Dominique Abdi.. If r is rational (r 0) and x is irrational, prove that r + x and rx are irrational. Solution. Assume the contrary, that r+x and rx are rational.
More informationExercises for Algebraic Topology
Sheet 1, September 13, 2017 Definition. Let A be an abelian group and let M be a set. The A-linearization of M is the set A[M] = {f : M A f 1 (A \ {0}) is finite}. We view A[M] as an abelian group via
More informationLet X be a topological space. We want it to look locally like C. So we make the following definition.
February 17, 2010 1 Riemann surfaces 1.1 Definitions and examples Let X be a topological space. We want it to look locally like C. So we make the following definition. Definition 1. A complex chart on
More informationFoliations of Three Dimensional Manifolds
Foliations of Three Dimensional Manifolds M. H. Vartanian December 17, 2007 Abstract The theory of foliations began with a question by H. Hopf in the 1930 s: Does there exist on S 3 a completely integrable
More informationPart V. 17 Introduction: What are measures and why measurable sets. Lebesgue Integration Theory
Part V 7 Introduction: What are measures and why measurable sets Lebesgue Integration Theory Definition 7. (Preliminary). A measure on a set is a function :2 [ ] such that. () = 2. If { } = is a finite
More informationSOLUTIONS TO THE FINAL EXAM
SOLUTIONS TO THE FINAL EXAM Short questions 1 point each) Give a brief definition for each of the following six concepts: 1) normal for topological spaces) 2) path connected 3) homeomorphism 4) covering
More informationCRITICAL POINTS AND SURJECTIVITY OF SMOOTH MAPS arxiv: v1 [math.ca] 28 Apr 2018
CRITICAL POINTS AND SURJECTIVITY OF SMOOTH MAPS arxiv:1804.10853v1 [math.ca] 28 Apr 2018 YONGJIE SHI 1 AND CHENGJIE YU 2 Abstract. Let f : M m N n be a smooth map between two differential manifolds with
More information30 Surfaces and nondegenerate symmetric bilinear forms
80 CHAPTER 3. COHOMOLOGY AND DUALITY This calculation is useful! Corollary 29.4. Let p, q > 0. Any map S p+q S p S q induces the zero map in H p+q ( ). Proof. Let f : S p+q S p S q be such a map. It induces
More informationFREUDENTHAL SUSPENSION THEOREM
FREUDENTHAL SUSPENSION THEOREM TENGREN ZHANG Abstract. In this paper, I will prove the Freudenthal suspension theorem, and use that to explain what stable homotopy groups are. All the results stated in
More informationIntegration and Manifolds
Integration and Manifolds Course No. 100 311 Fall 2007 Michael Stoll Contents 1. Manifolds 2 2. Differentiable Maps and Tangent Spaces 8 3. Vector Bundles and the Tangent Bundle 13 4. Orientation and Orientability
More informationEXOTIC SMOOTH STRUCTURES ON TOPOLOGICAL FIBRE BUNDLES B
EXOTIC SMOOTH STRUCTURES ON TOPOLOGICAL FIBRE BUNDLES B SEBASTIAN GOETTE, KIYOSHI IGUSA, AND BRUCE WILLIAMS Abstract. When two smooth manifold bundles over the same base are fiberwise tangentially homeomorphic,
More informationTOPOLOGY TAKE-HOME CLAY SHONKWILER
TOPOLOGY TAKE-HOME CLAY SHONKWILER 1. The Discrete Topology Let Y = {0, 1} have the discrete topology. Show that for any topological space X the following are equivalent. (a) X has the discrete topology.
More informationMA651 Topology. Lecture 9. Compactness 2.
MA651 Topology. Lecture 9. Compactness 2. This text is based on the following books: Topology by James Dugundgji Fundamental concepts of topology by Peter O Neil Elements of Mathematics: General Topology
More informationBROUWER FIXED POINT THEOREM. Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Preliminaries 1 3. Brouwer fixed point theorem 3 Acknowledgments 8 References 8
BROUWER FIXED POINT THEOREM DANIELE CARATELLI Abstract. This paper aims at proving the Brouwer fixed point theorem for smooth maps. The theorem states that any continuous (smooth in our proof) function
More informationEXTENSION OF HÖLDER S THEOREM IN Diff 1+ɛ
EXTENSION OF HÖLDER S THEOREM IN Diff 1+ɛ + (I) Azer Akhmedov Abstract: We prove that if Γ is subgroup of Diff 1+ɛ + (I) and N is a natural number such that every non-identity element of Γ has at most
More informationAlgebraic Topology exam
Instituto Superior Técnico Departamento de Matemática Algebraic Topology exam June 12th 2017 1. Let X be a square with the edges cyclically identified: X = [0, 1] 2 / with (a) Compute π 1 (X). (x, 0) (1,
More informationSmooth Structure. lies on the boundary, then it is determined up to the identifications it 1 2
132 3. Smooth Structure lies on the boundary, then it is determined up to the identifications 1 2 + it 1 2 + it on the vertical boundary and z 1/z on the circular part. Notice that since z z + 1 and z
More informationAlgebraic Topology. Oscar Randal-Williams. or257/teaching/notes/at.pdf
Algebraic Topology Oscar Randal-Williams https://www.dpmms.cam.ac.uk/ or257/teaching/notes/at.pdf 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Some recollections and conventions...................... 2 1.2 Cell complexes.................................
More informationAN EXPLORATION OF THE METRIZABILITY OF TOPOLOGICAL SPACES
AN EXPLORATION OF THE METRIZABILITY OF TOPOLOGICAL SPACES DUSTIN HEDMARK Abstract. A study of the conditions under which a topological space is metrizable, concluding with a proof of the Nagata Smirnov
More informationarxiv: v2 [math.ag] 24 Jun 2015
TRIANGULATIONS OF MONOTONE FAMILIES I: TWO-DIMENSIONAL FAMILIES arxiv:1402.0460v2 [math.ag] 24 Jun 2015 SAUGATA BASU, ANDREI GABRIELOV, AND NICOLAI VOROBJOV Abstract. Let K R n be a compact definable set
More informationB 1 = {B(x, r) x = (x 1, x 2 ) H, 0 < r < x 2 }. (a) Show that B = B 1 B 2 is a basis for a topology on X.
Math 6342/7350: Topology and Geometry Sample Preliminary Exam Questions 1. For each of the following topological spaces X i, determine whether X i and X i X i are homeomorphic. (a) X 1 = [0, 1] (b) X 2
More informationSurface Groups Within Baumslag Doubles
Fairfield University DigitalCommons@Fairfield Mathematics Faculty Publications Mathematics Department 2-1-2011 Surface Groups Within Baumslag Doubles Benjamin Fine Fairfield University, fine@fairfield.edu
More informationGEOMETRY HW 12 CLAY SHONKWILER
GEOMETRY HW 12 CLAY SHONKWILER 1 Let M 3 be a compact 3-manifold with no boundary, and let H 1 (M, Z) = Z r T where T is torsion. Show that H 2 (M, Z) = Z r if M is orientable, and H 2 (M, Z) = Z r 1 Z/2
More informationPart III. 10 Topological Space Basics. Topological Spaces
Part III 10 Topological Space Basics Topological Spaces Using the metric space results above as motivation we will axiomatize the notion of being an open set to more general settings. Definition 10.1.
More informationNOTES ON DIFFERENTIAL FORMS. PART 5: DE RHAM COHOMOLOGY
NOTES ON DIFFERENTIAL FORMS. PART 5: DE RHAM COHOMOLOGY 1. Closed and exact forms Let X be a n-manifold (not necessarily oriented), and let α be a k-form on X. We say that α is closed if dα = 0 and say
More informationCourse 212: Academic Year Section 1: Metric Spaces
Course 212: Academic Year 1991-2 Section 1: Metric Spaces D. R. Wilkins Contents 1 Metric Spaces 3 1.1 Distance Functions and Metric Spaces............. 3 1.2 Convergence and Continuity in Metric Spaces.........
More informationCHEVALLEY S THEOREM AND COMPLETE VARIETIES
CHEVALLEY S THEOREM AND COMPLETE VARIETIES BRIAN OSSERMAN In this note, we introduce the concept which plays the role of compactness for varieties completeness. We prove that completeness can be characterized
More information3 COUNTABILITY AND CONNECTEDNESS AXIOMS
3 COUNTABILITY AND CONNECTEDNESS AXIOMS Definition 3.1 Let X be a topological space. A subset D of X is dense in X iff D = X. X is separable iff it contains a countable dense subset. X satisfies the first
More informationHomotopy and homology groups of the n-dimensional Hawaiian earring
F U N D A M E N T A MATHEMATICAE 165 (2000) Homotopy and homology groups of the n-dimensional Hawaiian earring by Katsuya E d a (Tokyo) and Kazuhiro K a w a m u r a (Tsukuba) Abstract. For the n-dimensional
More information2. Intersection Multiplicities
2. Intersection Multiplicities 11 2. Intersection Multiplicities Let us start our study of curves by introducing the concept of intersection multiplicity, which will be central throughout these notes.
More informationAnalysis Finite and Infinite Sets The Real Numbers The Cantor Set
Analysis Finite and Infinite Sets Definition. An initial segment is {n N n n 0 }. Definition. A finite set can be put into one-to-one correspondence with an initial segment. The empty set is also considered
More informationSelf-intersections of Closed Parametrized Minimal Surfaces in Generic Riemannian Manifolds
Self-intersections of Closed Parametrized Minimal Surfaces in Generic Riemannian Manifolds John Douglas Moore Department of Mathematics University of California Santa Barbara, CA, USA 93106 e-mail: moore@math.ucsb.edu
More information0.1 Diffeomorphisms. 0.2 The differential
Lectures 6 and 7, October 10 and 12 Easy fact: An open subset of a differentiable manifold is a differentiable manifold of the same dimension the ambient space differentiable structure induces a differentiable
More informationDifferential Geometry qualifying exam 562 January 2019 Show all your work for full credit
Differential Geometry qualifying exam 562 January 2019 Show all your work for full credit 1. (a) Show that the set M R 3 defined by the equation (1 z 2 )(x 2 + y 2 ) = 1 is a smooth submanifold of R 3.
More informationMath 225A: Differential Topology, Homework 4
Math 225A: Differential Topology, Homework 4 Ian Coley February 10, 2014 Problem 1.5.4. Let X and Z be transversal submanifolds of Y. Prove that if y X Z, then T y (X Z) = T y (X) T y (Z). Since X Z is
More informationMath 530 Lecture Notes. Xi Chen
Math 530 Lecture Notes Xi Chen 632 Central Academic Building, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2G1, CANADA E-mail address: xichen@math.ualberta.ca 1991 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary
More informationThe geometry of secants in embedded polar spaces
The geometry of secants in embedded polar spaces Hans Cuypers Department of Mathematics Eindhoven University of Technology P.O. Box 513 5600 MB Eindhoven The Netherlands June 1, 2006 Abstract Consider
More informationAN INTRODUCTION TO THE FUNDAMENTAL GROUP
AN INTRODUCTION TO THE FUNDAMENTAL GROUP DAVID RAN Abstract. This paper seeks to introduce the reader to the fundamental group and then show some of its immediate applications by calculating the fundamental
More informationAn introduction to cobordism
An introduction to cobordism Martin Vito Cruz 30 April 2004 1 Introduction Cobordism theory is the study of manifolds modulo the cobordism relation: two manifolds are considered the same if their disjoint
More informationGeometry Qualifying Exam Notes
Geometry Qualifying Exam Notes F 1 F 1 x 1 x n Definition: The Jacobian matrix of a map f : N M is.. F m F m x 1 x n square matrix, its determinant is called the Jacobian determinant.. When this is a Definition:
More informationTHE LEFSCHETZ NUMBER OF AN
THE LEFSCHETZ NUMBER OF AN n-valued MULTIMAP Robert F. Brown Department of Mathematics University of California Los Angeles, CA 90095-1555 e-mail: rfb@math.ucla.edu January 12, 2007 Abstract An n-valued
More information